“The value of propaganda has no relationship to the degree of its truth, only with its credibility to the section of people at which it is aimed” -- Paul Bowles, “The Spider's House”

Mainstream news sources in the United States and the United Kingdom that are considered by many to be “leftist” or “liberal” or “impartial” are not guilty of producing the vile and blatant pro-Israeli propaganda of many of their peers. Nevertheless, their reportage on issues concerning Israel is frequently framed according to the narrative that is propagated by the Israeli government's public relations machine and perpetuates an entirely distorted and misleading image of the conflict.

Israel's actions are subtly legitimized through the choice of words that are utilized to describe them. This is particularly so when compared to those words chosen to describe the actions of others -- notably the Palestinians and Hezbollah. This manipulative use of language conditions the mainstream public to understand the conflict in an utterly warped and damaging fashion even if they manage to retain a level of sympathy for the Palestinian cause. The same is true of many journalists, who internalize this warped understanding and continue its propagation despite professing their sympathies with the Palestinians' suffering.

If one consults only mainstream media for information on the conflict in Palestine, what is immediately striking is that Israel appears to be in a permanent state of “retaliation” -- a phrase which immediately confers at least a modicum of legitimacy or justification upon the act to which it refers. Israel is never presented as the aggressor and however much its actions are condemned -- which they are by some mainstream sources -- they are invariably portrayed as a reaction to some form of provocation. Conversely, missiles launched from the Gaza Strip or southern Lebanon are habitually portrayed as “attacks” -- never “retaliations,” even if Israel has launched a devastating missile strike immediately prior to the event -- as so often is the case. The public is subliminally conditioned to understand that Israel is a permanent victim that on occasion is forced to lash out in response to the irrational and unruly aggression of illegitimate non-state actors that encircle it.

In this vein, one frequently reads or hears reports of “militants” who have been killed in the Gaza Strip -- a description which automatically implies violence and aggression on behalf of the victims, not the killers themselves. It also robs the victim of the legitimacy that the word “soldier” inherently lends to an individual -- to hear of “Israel Defense Forces [IDF] militants” would appear completely oxymoronic to someone conditioned to view the conflict through the prism which the mainstream US/UK media has developed.

According to the mainstream narrative, the war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006 was caused by Hezbollah's “kidnapping” of Israeli soldiers -- the immediate context of these events was almost entirely ignored, as was the inconvenient fact that during its brutal and decades-long occupation of southern Lebanon, Israel kidnapped Lebanese citizens on a massive scale. Besides, Israel does not “kidnap” but rather “detains” or “arrests” -- this choice of words again conferring a level of legitimacy upon the acts of Israel which the word “kidnap” does not upon those of Hezbollah. “Kidnap” implies the unlawful act of a criminal group whereas to “detain” or “arrest” has the connotation of an orderly legal process conducted by the authorities. Unfortunately, to imagine hearing of the “arrest” of an IDF soldier is equally as laughable as to imagine reading about the “kidnap” of a Palestinian civilian.

Since Israel's actions are constantly presented as those of a “state” or the “military” of a state -- the mainstream media automatically grants them a level of legitimacy and respect which they fundamentally deny the Palestinians without stopping to question why it is that they do not have their own state or military with which to earn such legitimacy. Sadly, the tragic irony of this paradox appears to be lost on those most guilty of perpetuating it.

(“The value of propaganda has no relationship to the degree of its truth, only with its credibility to the section of people at which it is aimed” -- Paul Bowles, “The Spider's House”)

In other words it doesn't matter what is true or false but more important is whether or not the target audience believes what is reported.

Sounds like Allday is talking about his own propaganda.

"Mainstream news sources in the United States and the United Kingdom that are considered by many to be “leftist” or “liberal” or “impartial” are not guilty of producing the vile and blatant pro-Israeli propaganda of many of their peers. "

"Nevertheless, their reportage on issues concerning Israel is frequently framed according to the narrative that is propagated by the Israeli government's public relations machine"
Again Allday totally inverts the truth.

"and perpetuates an entirely distorted and misleading image of the conflict."
This is true but not the complete truth. The complete truth is that the media distorts the facts in favor of muslims and palistinians.

"Israel's actions are subtly legitimized through the choice of words that are utilized to describe them. "
Actually once again here is a half truth used to invert the real truth. Israel's actions are legitimized by the facts rather than by the media. While the media has steadfastly tried to smear Israel in a bad light with false reporting and premature projections of guilt Israel has tried to be very careful with facts while recording and reporting their activities as openly as possible.

"This is particularly so when compared to those words chosen to describe the actions of others -- notably the Palestinians and Hezbollah. "
Another inversionof the truth. The media has tried desperately to cover the truth of the matter and paint Israel's enemies in a good light as far as is possible.

"This manipulative use of language conditions the mainstream public to understand the conflict in an utterly warped and damaging fashion even if they manage to retain a level of sympathy for the Palestinian cause."
Another inversion of the truth. It is the media's forced acceptance of the real news by honest Israeli reporting that has revealed the truth of the Palistinian cause to be so much rubbish and nothing more than a vile attempt to delegitimize Israel as a nation and a continual quest for the destruction of the State of Israel. All this in spite of a level of sympathy by the world for the myth of the palistinian cause.

"The same is true of many journalists, who internalize this warped understanding and continue its propagation despite professing their sympathies with the Palestinians' suffering."

Factual inversion again. Many journalists who have tried to portray Israel in a negative light while sympathizing with "Palistinians" have been at a loss as to how to defend the actions of Hamas, Hezbollah and PA.

"Israel appears to be in a permanent state of “retaliation” -- a phrase which immediately confers at least a modicum of legitimacy or justification upon the act to which it refers."
Allday fails to note that it is the palistinians who also claim they are only retaliating when they attack civilians. When Muslims target civilians such as school children, buses, cars and restaurants that can hardly be considered a retaliation as these people have done nothing to Muslims other than being Jewish. That's not retaliation. It's a barbaric terrorist attack against civilians.

"Israel is never presented as the aggressor and however much its actions are condemned "
Allday must of missed his medication or he needs some medication to bring him back to reality. Just saying it don't make it so Mr. Allday.

Mainstream media has continually tried to paint Israel as the aggressor but facts have always left the media painting themselves as liars instead. Then they have had to back up their attacks with retractions. And sometimes even apologies. (though the apologies are most rare)

" Conversely, missiles launched from the Gaza Strip or southern Lebanon are habitually portrayed as “attacks” -- never “retaliations,”

When Muslims launch rockets against civilian targets it's not a retaliation. It's a terroristic attack. It's designed to create terror in a civilian population. They are not retaliating against civilians who are going about their daily activities. They are attacking. There fore it's an attack. Civilians are not part of any legitimate military action unless you wish to call it reprisal and Israel has tried very hard to avoid civilian casualties in spite of hostilities. Israel does not target civilians. Muslims do target civilians and continually defend this attack on civilians while describing civilians as legitimate military targets.

"even if Israel has launched a devastating missile strike immediately prior to the event -- as so often is the case. "
Right? Allday has lost his mind. Israel does not launch a missile strike prior to an Islamic rocket attack. Unless you are saying that Israel knows when Muslims are about to launch an attack. Israel waits for a while and issues warnings often in advance of one of thier strikes against a target and then Muslims prepare a counter attack and wait for Israel to strike. When Israel launches a strike against a known target Gazan militants launch a counter attack. Israel often ignores harmless rocket attacks but enough is enough.

"The public is subliminally conditioned to understand that Israel is a permanent victim that on occasion is forced to lash out in response to the irrational and unruly aggression of illegitimate non-state actors that encircle it."

Perhaps because the public has seen enough and heard enough to finally see through the bullshit of of Islamic lies and the public now understands who are the aggressors. You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can never fool all of the people all of the time. Islam has been exposed. Now only stupid people believe in the Islamic rhetoric.

"In this vein, one frequently reads or hears reports of “militants” who have been killed in the Gaza Strip -- a description which automatically implies violence and aggression on behalf of the victims, not the killers themselves. "
You have better words?

"It also robs the victim of the legitimacy that the word “soldier” inherently lends to an individual --"
So now Allday admits these militants are soldiers? But when convienent he would call them civilians. Maybe a civilian with an AK47 walking around with a group of armed men while having no obvious uniform and having been known to engage in hostile acts against the State of Israel and it's citizens. If Hamas claims it has no control over them and these "militants" are launching rockets then are they legitimate soldiers? Are they in an army with a CO? If not then they are not legitimate military and can to be considered in that way. They are acting as terrorists against the orders of even Hamas leaders. The lofty words and sophistry while ignoring the complete facts does nothing to give these people legitimacy. They are sought out and after a careful observation and from time to time they are killed. In much the same way that USA takes out hostile terrorists such as the much aclaimed assination of OBL.

"to hear of “Israel Defense Forces [IDF] militants” would appear completely oxymoronic "
We can just stop right there. Because IDF trains soldiers that are under the control of an CO and ultimately under the control of the government of Israel. They are true soldiers in ever sense of the word and not some uncontrolled militants just acting out their own fantasies about destroying some civilian population as the Muslims are doing.
Unless Allday wishes to reverse his statements and claim that these militants are actual soldiers under the control of Hamas. Even Hamas and Hezbollah frequently deny responsibility for the actions of these militants.

"According to the mainstream narrative, the war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006 was caused by Hezbollah's “kidnapping” of Israeli soldiers -"

The quotes puts the lie on this statement which would be true enough without the quotes. The abduction or kidnapping was without provocation and was in itself a provocation that was carried out by Hezbollah's crossing of an international boundery. The soldiers had committed no offense and were never charged with an offense. They have been denied all humanitarian rights and then were murdered before being returned in exchange for a real murderer who had killed innocent people. Their lifeless bodies were finally exchanged for a man who had slammed a little boy's head against a rock. The boy's crime was to be the son of a Jew. It was a deliberate murder. And the abducted soldiers also had committed no crimes and were also deliberately murdered. There was no excuse for it.

"the immediate context of these events was almost entirely ignored,"
That was the immediate context. There is no other context. It was a provocation designed to start a war and that is what it accomplished.

"as was the inconvenient fact that during its brutal and decades-long occupation of southern Lebanon,"
After Israel withdrew from the region the muslims responded by attacking Christians. Does this make sense?

"Israel kidnapped Lebanese citizens on a massive scale. Besides, Israel does not “kidnap” but rather “detains” or “arrests” -- this choice of words again conferring a level of legitimacy upon the acts of Israel which the word “kidnap” does not upon those of Hezbollah. “Kidnap” implies the unlawful act of a criminal group whereas to “detain” or “arrest” has the connotation of an orderly legal process conducted by the authorities."
While true that Israel occupied Lebanon they were in fact an army of occupation. Whether they had a right to be there or not is another question. When they arrested or kidnapped Lebanese it was not done secretly. And how many dead bodies did they return to the families without explanation? These are nothing more than semantics of propaganda Allday attempts to use to legitimize an actual kidnapping and had nothing to do with the latest war with Lebanon. The occupation did not lead to the kidnapping of legitimate IDF soldiers who had caused no offense beyond following orders and guarding their borders. And what of the recent murder of an IDF soldier near a tree on the border? How did Israel respond to this offense?

"to imagine hearing of the “arrest” of an IDF soldier is equally as laughable as to imagine reading about the “kidnap” of a Palestinian civilian."

Depends on where the incident happened and what was the reason stated for the offense. When Shalit was "arrested" what was the offense? Where was he? Did Hamas have authority to make an arrest? Was there a warrent for his arrest? What were the charges? Did Hamas have jurisdiction for the arrest? Is Shalit allowed all the rights Israel has granted to it's own Palistinian prisoners? Does he have conjugal visits and holidays and phone calls and letters? Does he receive medical attention? No. No. No. No. And a thousand times no. That's the difference between an arrest and a kidnapping. Why doesn't Allday go over the IDF records from the occupation of Lebanon point by point? Is it because it is much easier to make accusations years after the withdrawal and cessation of hostilities and return to of authority to the government of Lebanon? And then use this as an excuse for further hostilities as if nothing Israel can do will make it right? What does Hezbollah want? Let them state their claim. Farms? Farms they never owned? Is it about land? Then ask for payment if Israel refuses to return the lands. Israel would be glad to just pay off Hezbollah in exchange for a treaty of peace. No more land for peace by the way. It never worked before and there is no chance it will work now.

"Since Israel's actions are constantly presented as those of a “state” or the “military” of a state --"

Israel is a state and it does have a military that is very carefully regulated and controlled. It's presented as that because that is the fact. It's reality.

"the mainstream media automatically grants them a level of legitimacy and respect which they fundamentally deny the Palestinians without stopping to question why it is that they do not have their own state or military with which to earn such legitimacy."
PA has a military force and a police force and a de facto government that is full of corruption, graft and embezzlement. That is their own fault. They have been granted billions of dollars with which to form a government. They have in fact had their own government and military but refuse to follow international standards of accountability that all governments must follow to retain a certain amount of repectibility.
When they were granted autonomy in Gaza the government promptly fractured along small ideological differences and began infighting with the two strongest contenders being Hamas and PA. PA lost in Gaza while Hamas was driven out of Judea and Samaria PA controlled areas.

"Sadly, the tragic irony of this paradox appears to be lost on those most guilty of perpetuating it."
So true, so true. Allday has made a tacit admission of guilt while attempting to project his own guilt and the guilt of his allies onto those who are innocent of such charges.

*Louis Allday is a London-based Middle East analyst.

In other words he is a nobody. An armchair anti-semite. (Hates Jews).

The Following User Says Thank You to johnleeknoefler For This Useful Post:

The hypocrisy people will engage to defend Israel never fails to astound me. I'm willing to criticise both sides, can you say the same, John?

The Hypocrisy, lies, and terror used by cowardly Arabs, who will do anything and say anything to get their way, never fails to astound me. Especially, when their sheep, and useful idiots, claim to "look at both sides."

The Hypocrisy, lies, and terror used by cowardly Arabs, who will do anything and say anything to get their way, never fails to astound me. Especially, when their sheep, and useful idiots, claim to "look at both sides."

Again, you're committing the cardinal sin of conflating Arab leaders and normal people. Your personal insults, again, show how thin your argument is. I think you need to have a cold shower and cool off.

not sure what mainstream media your referring to, lately Israel is under constant scrutiny from most all of the "Soros" media facets.

What would really please you is if they put up the white flag walk into the Mediterranean and give up existence. That is NOT going to happen. This is in a nutshell answer to your focused rant. Have a good day defending your hollowed accusations of mainstream media puttin up a poor Israel propaganda war.

The hypocrisy people will engage to defend Israel never fails to astound me. I'm willing to criticise both sides, can you say the same, John?

Good god dan, we get it, you hate Israel. I could make a propaganda thread based on all your bs propaganda. Both sides are guilty of things angering the other side. You only focus on one side, even carrying out the spread of muslim propaganda. You think hamas isn't balls deep in a propaganda campaign? Spreading lies to spread hate. And you support it like a tool.